You're viewing a single thread.
I'm really glad DaVinci Resolve exists to fill the void of a proper video editor too, Kdenlive just ain't it for me.
Unfortunately the free version on Linux doesn't support H.264/H.265 and even the paid version doesn't support AAC so using Resolve requires you to transcode if you're using any normal consumer camera.
doesn't support AAC
Use OPUS. Better and free.
The point was probably that if your equipment or sources use aac, you will need to transcode it, losing quality in the process. We don't always control our media sources and the formats they use.
That's it exactly. Most consumer camera gear uses H.264/H.265 for video and AAC for audio in an MP4 container and the free version of Davinci Resolve just doesn't support that on Linux. (But does on Windows)
If it even doesn't support import and export in those formats, you can try externally decode audio and video and store in lossless format. FLAC for audio and something like FFV1 for video.
Since you are cutting video in pieces, applying filters and all the fun stuff, you are transcoding it anyway.
Yes, but then you would be transcoding an already transcoded video, potentially making the losses apparent. It would be better to just transcode once at the exporting process.
It would be better to just transcode once at the exporting process.
Lossy encoding only happens once in both cases.
How direct import-export works: input file -> lossy format decompressor of editor -> filters -> lossy format compressor of editor -> output
How external codecs work: input -> external lossy format decompressor -> intermediate representation(lossless codec, can be just storing raw frames) -> IR decoder of editor -> filters -> IR encoder of editor -> external lossy format compressor -> output
Both options have only one lossy step - lossy encoder. Or technically two - also filters, but this is editor's intention.
Oh, I get it now, you mean using a lossless format as intermediate. Well, it would work but still it would be better if they didn't require this extra work on linux.
I love kden, very logical ui and love that it can do anything. What is it about DaVinci that appeals?
Both work well, but DaVinci is better with color grading, audio post-production, visual effects, collaboration, and format support, just to name a few. It's a professional product made for professionals.
I've had the same experience too. Last I checked, Kdenlive doesn't have GPU rendering either. DaVinci resolve slaps though. And you can get a paid copy. Get outta here with that subscription nonsense, Adobe.